Shoju wrote:This wasn't evil. Mental Illness isn't "Evil". It's not the devil. It's not the fucking exorcist. It's real. It is indeed terrible, but not for the reasons that you might think.

While I get that sometimes people are unfairly belittling of mental illnesses, at the same time, it's not quite that simplistic.

For example, people faking a mental disorder such as panic attacks or PTSD is sadly pretty common, and oftentimes there is no real definitive way of verifying the veracity of their claimed condition because diagnosis boils down to "you tell the doctor you experience symptoms x, y, and z; the doctor believes you because why would you lie". It's not like you can run blood work to establish if someone has PTSD.

But conversely, it's kind of hard to fake having cancer.

It may not be politically correct or culturally sensitive to say it, but there are a non-zero amount of people who fake mental disorders because of either monetary incentives or because it gets them special treatment or serves as an excuse for nonperformance. You can't just brush that factor aside with plithy graphics.

Theckhd wrote:big numbers are the in-game way of expressing that Brekkie's penis is huge.

Brekkie wrote:While I get that sometimes people are unfairly belittling of mental illnesses, at the same time, it's not quite that simplistic.

For example, people faking a mental disorder such as panic attacks or PTSD is sadly pretty common, and oftentimes there is no real definitive way of verifying the veracity of their claimed condition because diagnosis boils down to "you tell the doctor you experience symptoms x, y, and z; the doctor believes you because why would you lie". It's not like you can run blood work to establish if someone has PTSD.

It's normally, a little more involved in that, and while it is common in some circumstances to fake a mental illness, there is a fair bit more to the diagnostic than telling the doctor x y and z, and they believing you.

That's belittling to those who work in the mental health field.

But conversely, it's kind of hard to fake having cancer.

To a doctor? Sure it's hard. To the public? not really. I've seen it done, convincingly, leading someone to bilk a few thousand bucks, and lots of attention.

It may not be politically correct or culturally sensitive to say it, but there are a non-zero amount of people who fake mental disorders because of either monetary incentives or because it gets them special treatment or serves as an excuse for nonperformance. You can't just brush that factor aside with plithy graphics.

You are correct, but it's also a small amount of people. it isn't the majority. I would wager a healthy sum of money that it is in fact an incredibly small number, and using it as a reason to be skeptical is rather specious.

Brekkie:Tanks are like shitty DPS. And healers are like REALLY distracted DPSAmirya:Why yes, your penis is longer than his because you hit 30k dps in the first 10 seconds. But guess what? That raid boss has a dick bigger than your ego. Flex:I don't make mistakes. I execute carefully planned strategic group wipes.Levie:(in /g) It's weird, I have a collar and I dont know where I got it from, Worgen are kinky!Levie:Drunk Lev goes and does what he pleases just to annoy sober Lev.Sagara:You see, you need to *spread* the bun before you insert the hot dog.

Brekkie:Tanks are like shitty DPS. And healers are like REALLY distracted DPSAmirya:Why yes, your penis is longer than his because you hit 30k dps in the first 10 seconds. But guess what? That raid boss has a dick bigger than your ego. Flex:I don't make mistakes. I execute carefully planned strategic group wipes.Levie:(in /g) It's weird, I have a collar and I dont know where I got it from, Worgen are kinky!Levie:Drunk Lev goes and does what he pleases just to annoy sober Lev.Sagara:You see, you need to *spread* the bun before you insert the hot dog.

This is incredibly disturbing. Going off of the numbers in the article, 15 drug crimes in 14 years. That's a rate of just over 1 a year. At a hotel that rents 14000 rooms a year.

So....

15 times, out of 210,000, is enough for the government to come in and take your property? That's....

.00007142857%

There is no cause. The Hotel Owner seems to be in good standing with the local police. He's never been charged with a crime, and the local police didn't even think it was a big enough deal to talk with him about it.

“As he describes his job, he looks through the newspapers and looks at the Internet, looking for news stories of properties that might be forfeitable and brings them to the attention of the U.S. attorney,” Caswell’s attorney, Larry Salzman, said.

According to the agent’s sworn testimony, he then goes to the Registry of Deeds to determine the value of the targeted property. The DEA rejects anything with less than $50,000 equity.

In the case of the Caswell, the agent saw its worth close to $1.5 million with no mortgage. That made it a fat target for the U.S. attorney, says another of Caswell’s lawyers, Scott Bullock.

If the facts are even remotely close to being accurate, I have to agree with the lawyer. I may not completely agree that Civil Forfeiture is the devil (My son's mother lost her home because she was RUNNING a crack house, I'm ok with that), in this instance, this is ridiculous.

“This is the exact opposite of the criminal standard where the government has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you are guilty,” Bullock said. “In civil forfeiture laws you have to prove your innocence. And that’s one of the main reasons that civil forfeiture laws simply should not exist.”

There is something to this statement though. What happened to Innocent until Proven Guilty? Where is the Government's Burden of Proof?

Why isn't the DEA going into Vegas and seizing the Strip?

“I’ve found, which is kind of hard to believe, but I’m responsible for the action of people I don’t even know, I’ve never even met, and for the most part I have no control over them,” Caswell said. “And yet I have to rent them a room unless I have a real good reason not to or I get accused of discrimination and that kind of thing.

It's pretty interesting to think of it that way. As a business Owner, you "technically" have the right to refuse service, but what happens now, in a more interconnected society? Hell, I've seen things blow up on facebook and destroy people, and a small business here locally, and it was completely innaccurate. Someone claimed that they were discriminated against because they were Latino at a local Hair Salon, and the Salon was picketed, it was vandalized, it was all over the facebook. Come to find out? The woman was denied a hair cut and style because she had a raging case of Head Lice. But by the time people were actually listening to reason, the Hair Salon's business had been ruined, the stripmall owner served eviction (thanks to being a new owner of the stripmall, and the salon not having a "formal" lease with the old owners due to length of time in business)

Not the same as what happened to the motel, but it shows the power of social media to believe just about anything they want, and how word spreads. And from the wiki on Tewksberry, it's not even as big of a city as where I live. Word travels fast.

It really feels that way. I mean, Are we really going to say that the Vegas Strip Casino Hotels don't have an at least similar .00007142857% Drug Crime Rate over a similar time frame? What about businesses that close at night? Are they going to be held accountable for problems that happen on their property once they are closed? What about Landlords? I just don't see this case as anything except the government going after someone because they can.

Shoju wrote:It really feels that way. I mean, Are we really going to say that the Vegas Strip Casino Hotels don't have an at least similar .00007142857% Drug Crime Rate over a similar time frame? What about businesses that close at night? Are they going to be held accountable for problems that happen on their property once they are closed? What about Landlords? I just don't see this case as anything except the government going after someone because they can.

Well, it seems the government is going for a cheap alternative to Eminent Domain.

Or its the opening salvo, I mean, if they win against this small motel owner they have a precedent case for going after the big places, then selling it back I would guess - instant revenue... ooor its the case of some agent being personally peeved at the motel for some reason.

also, not fully up to speed on US case law, but as a business owner, are you allowed to arbitrarily deny service, or do you have to have an actual reason to do so (disregard social media etc)?

Nooska wrote:Or its the opening salvo, I mean, if they win against this small motel owner they have a precedent case for going after the big places, then selling it back I would guess - instant revenue... ooor its the case of some agent being personally peeved at the motel for some reason.

also, not fully up to speed on US case law, but as a business owner, are you allowed to arbitrarily deny service, or do you have to have an actual reason to do so (disregard social media etc)?

Technically, yes. But then you open yourself to having to prove it wasn't for discrimination based on race gender age social status, etc...

Interesting. Sounds like the whole reason it's been overturned is to highlight the problem with that particular bit of law and make sure the conviction is re-done as something legally solid (i.e., get them to retrial and convict as initiating sex with sleeping person so that particular legal loophole is dodged).

KysenMurrin wrote:Interesting. Sounds like the whole reason it's been overturned is to highlight the problem with that particular bit of law and make sure the conviction is re-done as something legally solid (i.e., get them to retrial and convict as initiating sex with sleeping person so that particular legal loophole is dodged).

Ancient methods provide the most amusing solution here. If the punishment would be to have your balls cut off but "she really liked it up to the point she found the ruse", cut just one :p